Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-06-Speech-3-031"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020206.3.3-031"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, it is my duty, as representative of the Presidency of the Council of the Union, to speak briefly about these issues of Justice and Home Affairs.
In the specific case of the lists of terrorist organisations, I must emphasise that the Council has prepared two lists. Firstly, a confidential document drawn up by the ‘Terrorism’ group, which it noted at the meeting on 7 December and which features 34 terrorist organisations. This list was part, until 1 June 2001, of the Presidency’s ‘Threat’ document, which was confidential and never seen by the European Parliament. Furthermore, under the Belgian Presidency, it was agreed that a declassified document on threats would be drawn up, to be passed to the European Parliament and which you will receive as soon as the various language versions are ready.
Clearly, the Treaty contains no provision that obliges the Council to consult or inform Parliament on this confidential document, which, in any event, would lose its value if it were discussed in public, and is ultimately intended for the antiterrorist services of the Member States.
The other Council Decision is 2001/927/EC, which contains a public list of individuals and terrorist organisations, linked to Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001 and to Common Positions 01/930 and 01/931.
The adoption of these instruments responds to an exceptional situation, in which compliance with the European Council mandate and with Resolution 1373 of the United Nations Security Council take precedence over any other consideration. European public opinion demanded that we act rapidly, visibly and decisively in the fight against terrorism. Despite this urgency, the Council consulted Parliament on Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001, but changes to the legislative format, when the Council reserved for itself powers of execution, in accordance with Article 202 of the Treaty, confirmed by the case-law of the Court of Justice, do not oblige us to consult Parliament
Despite all this, the Presidency of the Council wishes to reiterate its will to have the European Parliament participate, within the framework of the Treaties and to as large an extent as possible, in issues of Justice and Home Affairs, and will keep this Parliament informed on matters of police and judicial cooperation. The presence of the first Vice-President of the Government and Minister of Home Affairs and of the Minister of Justice of the Presidency in these recent weeks in this Parliament underline the will of the Presidency to work with this Parliament.
Lastly, with regard to the definition of a terrorist act, the text of the Common Position 01/931 takes up the content of the Council framework Decision, on which Parliament was consulted.
I believe the position of my country as a great proponent of the area of security, justice and freedom is well known. The Spanish Presidency has, from the very beginning, reiterated its commitment to work closely with the European Parliament, as demonstrated by the appearances before this Parliament of the President-in-Office of the Council, the President of the Spanish Government, the first Vice-President of the Government and Minister for Home Affairs and the Minister of Justice before the Committee of Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs.
My presence here today is underpinned by the will to maintain a fluid relationship between both institutions and to maintain institutional cooperation with this House.
By approving the first Watson report, which led the way on these issues of terrorism, and the important resolution adopted on 5 September last year, the European Parliament put itself in the vanguard of the international community in the fight against terrorism, and, specifically, it is of great significance that this happened on 5 September, before the 11th, a date on which international society seemed to discover the disease that had pervaded it. I would say that the approval of this report demonstrated the European Parliament’s great willingness to confront the threats of our time.
The content of the Watson report, to which the Presidency subscribes, created the necessary political atmosphere for the European Commission, which had for a long time been working on the preparations for the framework decisions on the fight against terrorism and the European arrest warrant, to table, as a matter of urgency after 11 September, both legislative drafts, which achieved consensus in the Council of Justice and Home Affairs of 6 and 7 December and which were given political endorsement at the Laeken European Council.
The European Parliament has just issued its report on both decisions, with an extremely high level of technical competence and political sensitivity. I must say that the speed with which the Council has had to debate these issues in order to meet the expectations of our society after the events of 11 September should not allow us to forget the importance today of this debate in the European Parliament.
We are obviously aware of the feeling in the European Parliament that it did not have enough time to debate these issues and I should, therefore, like to clarify that the two framework Decisions respond to the European Parliament’s request to the Council in its Resolution of 5 November 2001, to adopt measures to this end. As I have already said, the European Commission spent some time studying the proposals and was able to present them immediately after the attacks of 11 September, thanks to the work that had been carried out beforehand.
With regard to the list of terrorist organisations, the Spanish Presidency is aware of the unease caused in this Parliament by the Council’s adoption, on 27 December last year, under the Belgian Presidency, of a list of terrorist organisations, closely linked to Regulation (EC) No 2580/2001, without there being any prior consultation of the European Parliament, which had made clear its desire to state its opinion on this issue.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are clearly not going to discuss the legality of the Decision adopted by the Council under Article 15 of the Treaty on European Union, and rather than the legality, we should speak about political approaches, and I can say on behalf of the Council that our institution is perfectly willing to maintain the closest contact with this Parliament under Article 39(1) of the Treaty on European Union."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples